West Virginia Cwp Fund v. Elsie Stacy
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 24201
| 4th Cir. | 2011Background
- PPACA amended the Black Lung Benefits Act to revive automatic survivors’ benefits and restore the 15-year presumption.
- Section 1556(b) reinstated automatic survivors’ benefits by removing limiting language from § 932( l ); Section 1556(a) reimposed the 15-year presumption.
- Elsie Stacy, widow of miner Howard Stacy, sought survivors’ benefits after his death while he had been receiving BLBA benefits.
- The Director granted benefits under amended § 932( l ); the Benefits Review Board remanded for an award.
- West Virginia Coal Workers’ Pneumocosis Fund challenged the PPACA amendments as unconstitutional or inapplicable to Stacy’s claim.
- The Fourth Circuit affirmed, upholding retroactive application and the Director’s interpretation that § 932( l ) applies to survivors’ claims filed after Jan 1, 2005 and pending on or after March 23, 2010.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retroactivity and due process | Stacy argues retroactive § 932( l ) violates substantive due process | Congress rationally aimed to compensate survivors for past disabilities | No due process violation; retroactivity rational and permissible |
| Takings challenge | PPACA amendments unlawfully take property by imposing retroactive obligations | Obligation to pay money is not a taking; no identifiable property interest | Takings claim fails |
| Statutory interpretation of Section 1556(c) | Survivors’ claims should be governed by the survivor-date, not the miner’s claim date | Amended § 932( l ) applies to all claims after Jan 1, 2005 that are pending on or after Mar 23, 2010 | Director’s interpretation is persuasive; § 932( l ) applies to Stacy’s survivor claim |
| Conflict with §§ 901, 921(a), 922(a)(2) | These provisions may bar automatic survivors’ benefits | Amended § 932( l ) overrides conflicting language in those sections | Amended § 932( l ) overrides; survivors receive automatic benefits |
Key Cases Cited
- Usery v. Turner Elkhorn Mining Co., 428 U.S. 1 (1965) (retroactivity of liability for past disabilities sustained under rational government purposes)
- Keene v. Consolidation Coal Co., 645 F.3d 844 (7th Cir. 2011) (retroactive revival of presumption upheld; line-drawing reasonable)
- Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel, 524 U.S. 498 (1998) (takings analysis not applicable to pure monetary obligations; limited plurality context)
- B&G Construction Co. v. Dir., OWCP, 3d Cir. 2011 WL 5068092 (3d Cir. 2011) (persuasive on § 932( l ) supremacy over conflicting provisions)
- Holland v. Big River Minerals Corp., 181 F.3d 597 (4th Cir. 1999) (takings/due process framing for monetary obligations)
- U.S. Railroad Retirement Bd. v. Fritz, 449 U.S. 166 (1980) (line-drawing in statutory classifications for benefits)
- Posadas v. National City Bank, 296 U.S. 497 (1936) (repeals by implication and conflict resolution principles)
- Connelly v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., 475 U.S. 211 (1986) (legislative scheme adjustments and remedial legislation)
- Unity Real Estate Co. v. Hudson, 178 F.3d 649 (3d Cir. 1999) (circuit alignment with Eastern Enterprises on takings theory)
- Swisher Int’l, Inc. v. Schafer, 550 F.3d 1046 (11th Cir. 2008) (takings analysis not for pure monetary obligations)